<span>Salutary neglect was an undocumented, 'though long-standing, the British policy of avoiding strict enforcement of parliamentary laws, meant to keep the American colonies obedient to Great Britain. Prime Minister Robert Walpole stated that "If no restrictions were placed on the colonies, they would flourish"[citation needed]. This policy, which lasted from about 1607 to 1763, allowed the enforcement of trade relations laws to be lenient. Walpole did not believe in enforcing the Navigation Acts, established under Oliver Cromwell and Charles II and designed to force the colonists to trade only with England, Scotland and Ireland,which were also under Britain's control. Successive British governments ended this policy through acts such as the Stamp Act and Sugar Act, causing tensions within the colonies.
Salutary neglect occurred in three time periods. From 1607 to 1696, England had no coherent imperial policy. From 1696 to 1763, England (and after 1707 Britain) tried to form a coherent policy (navigation acts) but did not enforce it. Lastly, from 1763 to 1775 Britain began to try to use a coherent policy.
Salutary neglect was a large contributing factor that led to the American Revolutionary War. Since the imperial authority did not assert the power that it had, the colonists were left to govern themselves. These essentially sovereign colonies soon became accustomed to the idea of self-control. The effects of such prolonged isolation eventually resulted in the emergence of a collective identity that considered itself separate from Great Britain.
The turning point from salutary neglect to an attempt enforce British policies was the Seven Years' War (French and Indian War). Great Britain was fighting France for imperial control of the known world (including North America, where the war was started and was losing very badly until Secretary of State William Pitt took charge. To help the war Britain toward the Colonists. These tensions caused England to abandon its policy of salutary neglect, which led directly to the American Revolution.</span>
The book of Leviticus is of a significant importance for Hebrew tradition, because it is the book in which God basically teaches Israel what is the right thing to do and how to do the right things. This book, in very short words, tells people that God is separate from other gods, being him the one and only God,the real one, instituting the correct forms to worship him.
In the book of Leviticus, versicles 25:1; 26:46; 27:34, it is stated that the people of Israel was at the foot of Mount Sinai, where God´s lawwas given to Moses.
Answer:
"Dred Scott Decision," which was very controversial.
Explanation:
DRED SCOTT DECISION where the Supreme Court ruling stated slaves did not have a right to sue since they were not citizens, but merely property.
These were their arguments.
Dred Scott:
When a person enters a free State or territory, the free status overrides the previous condition of servitude. Since slavery was forbidden in the free States and territories by
federal and State laws, Dred Scott became free when he entered Illinois and Wisconsin.
Sandford:
To deprive a person of property (in this case, Dred Scott) without due process or just compensation violated the 5th Amendment, which states that “No person shall be… deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Dred Scott was still a slave and no master's property rights could be limited or taken away by a State or federal law.
I believe your answer is B. mormons to utah
Hope this helps!
